From the post:
“I really believe that Second Life is another example of a web 2.0 property that marketers should explore and understand. It opens up a window into the future of 3D web, but I still need to be convinced about broader marketing activities and here is why:
- The technology is still too complex
- The model is not yet scaleable
- The subscriber statistics are misleading
- The model’s scaleability is further threatened by a corporate IT backlash.
- The content is primarily adult oriented
- Brands are underestimating the investments required
- Brands are not staying true to the Second Life values
- Second Life experiences are not integrated with the overall brand experience
- Potential revenues and profits are limited
- I barely have time for my first life……”
From the comments: Prokofy
“#7. Brands are not staying true to the Second Life values. Some companies have really flat-footed it and disrupted the labour force, the events calendar, the media coverage and indeed that has backlashed on them.
I agree that some brands’ *presentation* would be utterly inappropriate; nobody can drink Coke in a virtual world, you can’t drink. That doesn’t mean Coke couldn’t sponsor hockey games, ballet, clubs, live music, architecture just as it does in RL.
The companies need to support the environment and the experience so that avatars begin to associate the brand with their virtual experience, not be literalist about pushing a discrete product into their little avatar hands.”